The group of experts was modeled after the official CIA Team B, whose 1976 contrary analysis said U.S. intelligence assessments had underestimated Soviet nuclear forces. That Team B report led to the military buildup under the Reagan administration.

What if the “moderate” muslims who have influence in Washington aren’t really … wait for it … moderate. The White House has taken the stance that Islam itself has absolutely nothing to do with terrorism.

The Team B report calls for developing a counterstrategy to Islamist ideology, but notes that understanding the nature of the enemy is a critical first step.

“That cannot be done by following the failed strategy of fictionalizing the state of Islam in the vain hope that reality will, at some point, catch up to the benign fable,” the report says. “Empowering the condign elements of Islam requires a candid assessment, which acknowledges the strength of Shariah — just as defeat of 20th century totalitarian ideologies required an acknowledgment of, and respect for, their malevolent capabilities.”

Sharia is incompatible with Democracy. Period. EOL. Sharia in any form.

The report cites the 1991 document from the Muslim Brotherhood in North America describing a covert process of Islamic “settlement” in the United States. The plan is to carry out a “grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated,” the document stated.

You say these folks are the moderates we find in the United States? Islamic radicals have again and again been found not only living among us but having power and influence both in DC and on American muslims.

This is precisely the kind of infiltration and willful blindness to the threat to America posed by Muslim Brotherhood front organizations we cited in our report issued this week. Continuing to ignore this threat, as urged by the Congressional Muslim Staffers Association and the Council on American-Islamic Relations, will only lead us further into submission to the advocates of a global Islamic state and the imposition of shariah.

Right HERE, in the United States, hateful Wahhabi ideology is preached:

Democracy in particular is demonized in Wahhabi ideology. In one book published in Riyadh by the Al-Nahawi Printing House, collected by Freedom House from the Abu Bakr Mosque in San Diego, it is written, “Satan and his soldiers have found a home for themselves there… Democracy is in need of someone to save it from itself.” In order to rectify the evils of democracy, the Wahhabi American mosques advocate for jihad and terror, teaching that, “[we] will pursue this evil force [modernist civilization] to its own lands, invade its Western heartland, and struggle to overcome it until all the world shouts by the name of the Prophet and the teachings of Islam spread throughout the world. Only then will Muslims achieve their fundamental goal, and there will be no more ‘persecution’ and all religion will be exclusively for Allah…” That quote comes from “To Be a Muslim”, published by Saudi Arabia’s International Islamic Publishing House and collected from the Al-Farouq Mosque in Houston.

Certainly, you say, this occurs in the minority of mosques. You’d be wrong. Estimates in 2003 put the number at about eighty percent of American mosques as being under Saudi-Wahhabi influence.

At the present time, Shia and other non-Wahhabi Muslim community leaders estimate that 80 percent of American mosques are under Wahhabi control. This does not mean 80 percent of American Muslims support Wahhabism, although the main Wahhabi ideological agency in America, the so-called Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) has claimed that some 70 percent of American Muslims want Wahhabi teaching in their mosques. This is a claim we consider unfounded.

Rather, Wahhabi control over mosques means control of property, buildings, appointment of imams, training of imams, content of preaching — including faxing of Friday sermons from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia — and of literature distributed in mosques and mosque bookstores, notices on bulletin boards, and organizational solicitation. Similar influence extends to prison and military chaplaincies, Islamic elementary and secondary schools (academies), college campus activity, endowment of academic chairs and programs in Middle East studies, and most notoriously, charities ostensibly helping Muslims abroad, many of which have been linked to or designated as sponsors of terrorism.

Anyway, I’m busy reading the report. It’s 180 pages.

Updated as I read and quote the good bits:

Ultimately, the Muslim Brotherhood intends for America to live under shariah. This ambition was explicitly stated in 1996 by Abdurahman Alamoudi, at the time one of the top agents of the Muslim Brotherhood operation in the United States. Back then, Almoudi enjoyed access to the Clinton White House since, as the founder of the American Muslim council and a director of numerous other Brotherhood fronts, he was considered a leading spokesman for the Muslim community in America. (He is currently serving a twenty-three year federal prison term on terrorism-related charges.)
At the Islamic Association of Palestine’s annual convention in Illinois in 1996, Alamoudi declared; “I have no doubt in my mind, Muslims sooner or later will be the moral leadership of America. It depends on me and you, either we do it now or we do it after a hundred years, but this country will become a Muslim country.”

This is all part of the stealth jihad or civilization jihad.

Implementing Sharia by the Muslim Brotherhood. How much of this stuff is already going on?

74
• Expanding the Muslim presence by birth rate, immigration, and refusal to as-
similate;
• Occupying and expanding domination of physical spaces;
• Ensuring the “Muslim Community” knows and follows MB doctrine;
• Controlling the language we use in describing the enemy;
• Ensuring we do not study their doctrine (shariah);
• Co-opting key leadership;
• Forcing compliance with shariah at local levels;
• Fighting all counterterrorism efforts;
• Subverting religious organizations;
• Employing lawfare – the offensive use of lawsuits and threats of lawsuits;
• Claiming victimization / demanding accommodations;
• Condemning “slander” against Islam;
• Subverting the U.S. education system, in particular, infiltrating and dominating
U.S. Middle East studies programs;
• Demanding the right to practice shariah in segregated Muslim enclaves;
• Demanding recognition of shariah in non-Muslim spheres;
• Confronting and denouncing Western society, laws, and traditions; and
• Demanding that shariah replace Western law.

Success of the plot:

Before his fall, Abdurahman Alamoudi was one of the leaders of the global Islamic Movement and one of its most successful influence operatives. His arrest and conviction should have sent shock waves through the U.S. intelligence community, particularly its counterintelligence units, since Alamoudi’s blown cover provided a reality check on the extent of shariah’s stealth jihad in this country, and how badly we have been penetrated.
Here was, after all, proof that an al Qaeda and Hamas operative had enjoyed access to the most senior levels of the American government. Thanks to that access, he was allowed – among other things – to create and run the program for selecting and placing members of his team to proselytize as Muslim chaplains in what can be the two most lucrative target populations for jihadist recruiters: the U.S. military and imprisoned felons.

They are everywhere. The list muslim groups associated with the Muslim Brotherhood is too long. And:

To reiterate, most Muslim organizations in North America are controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood or a derivative group (Hizb ut-Tahrir, Tablighi Jamaat, Jamaat-e-Islami, etc). If an individual is the president, vice president, executive director, general secretary, board member or otherwise carries a significant leadership title within a Muslim organization controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood in America – particularly if he is responsible for the group’s financial affairs, or sits on the Fiqh Council of North America – he is a Muslim Brother. The Ikhwan simply will not entrust such stature and responsibility to anyone unless he enjoys the trust that derives from being a member in good standing of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Groups are not always “fronts” but they are allowed to exist as long as they do embrace the ideology of the MB (Sharia).

This is sorta interesting:

Certain similarities between dhimmi life under Islam and “politically correct” life in a multicultural world are striking. We have long lived in such a self-censoring society, stunted by a kind of fear that political incorrectness would result in opprobrium, ostracism or professional failure. Traditionally (because multiculturalism, as noted above, has been with us long enough to be characterized as a tradition), this has had nothing to do with Islam or the dhimmi. But this now-well-established practice does help explain the seamless compatibility between dhimmitude and the multicultural mindset that flourishes in our post-modernist world.

The “dhimmi” under Islam lived and existed by the pleasure of his Islamic master. They were “servile” in language and demeanor for “fear of retaliation of for their self preservation.” Lost, while living under such circumstance, were the dhimmis identity. Their histories and traditions.

Ironic that even opposing the GZM is enough to bring threats of violence against our nation. We’re living as dhimmis already.

There is a TON of information in this report.

Of particular concern are the 2010 versions of the Pentagon’s Quadrennial Defense Review, the Homeland Security Department’s Quadrennial Review413 and the White House-issued National Security Strategy.414 All hew to the same troubling language guidelines promulgated by DHS,415 the FBI’s Counter- terrorism Analytical Lexicon416 and the National Counterterrorism Center’s vocabulary regulations417 – to the effect that no reference to Islam, jihad or shariah may be made when discussing the threat. This is not simply incompetence. It amounts to malfeasance and it places the U.S. government demonstrably and officially in compliance with Islamic law on slander – a posture that puts the nation in grave peril.

ba haaa haaa :

In the NYU speech, Brennan also enthused about the very heart of the shariah enterprise, Saudi Arabia, where he had once served as the CIA station chief: “In Saudi Arabia, I saw how our Saudi partners fulfilled their duty as custodians of the two holy mosques at Mecca and Medina. I marveled at the majesty of the Hajj and the devotion of those who fulfilled their duty as Muslims by making that pilgrimage.”429
The only way Brennan could literally have seen how the Saudis “fulfilled their duty as custodians of Mecca and Medina” and “marvel at the Hajj” is if he himself were a Muslim. That is because non-Muslims are not allowed to set foot in either place. Assuming he was speaking figuratively in this effusive way, the message of pandering – read, once again, submission – was as unmistakable to the intended audience, namely the House of Saud, as was President Obama’s notorious bow to the Saudi king.

Recommendations?

page 142
• U.S. policy-makers, financiers, businessmen, judges, journalists, community leaders and the public at large must be equipped with an accurate understanding of the nature of shariah and the necessity of keeping America shariah-free. At a minimum, this will entail resisting – rather than acquiescing to – the concerted
efforts now being made to allow that alien and barbaric legal code to become es-
tablished in this country as an alternate, parallel system to the Constitution and the laws enacted pursuant to it. Arguably, this is already in effect for those who have taken an oath to “support and defend” the Constitution, because the requirement is subsumed in that oath.
• U.S. government agencies and organizations should cease their outreach to Muslim communities through Muslim Brotherhood fronts whose mission is to destroy our country from within as such practices are both reckless and counterproductive. Indeed, these activities serve to legitimate, protect and expand the influence of our enemies. They conduce to no successful legal outcome that cannot be better advanced via aggressive prosecution of terrorists, terrorfunders and other lawbreakers. It also discourages patriotic Muslims from providing actual assistance to the U.S. government lest they be marked for ostracism or worse by the Brothers and other shariah-adherent members of their communities.
• In keeping with Article VI of the Constitution, extend bans currently in effect that bar members of hate groups such as the Ku Klux Klan from holding positions of trust in federal, state, or local governments or the armed forces of the United States to those who espouse or support shariah. Instead, every effort should be made to identify and empower Muslims who are willing publicly to denounce shariah.
• Practices that promote shariah – notably, shariah-compliant finance and the establishment or promotion in public spaces or with public funds of facilities and activities that give preferential treatment to shariah’s adherents – are incompatible with the Constitution and the freedoms it enshrines and must be proscribed.
• Sedition is prohibited by law in the United States. To the extent that imams and mosques are being used to advocate shariah in America, they are promoting seditious activity and should be warned that they will not be immune from prosecution.
• Textbooks used in both secular educational systems and Islamic schools must not promote shariah, its tenets, or the notion that America must submit to its dictates.
• Compounds and communities that seek to segregate themselves on the basis of shariah law, apply it alongside or in lieu of the law of the land or otherwise establish themselves as “no-go” zones for law enforcement and other authorities must be thwarted in such efforts. In this connection, assertion of claims to territory around mosques should be proscribed.
• Immigration of those who adhere to shariah must be precluded, as was previously done with adherents to the seditious ideology of communism.